Novak: Clinton Cooked Government Books?

NewsMax.com ^ | 8/08/02 | Carl Limbacher and NewsMax.com Staff

[Russ]

Nothing to see here, folks. Move on...

[Freee-dame]

Novak's report has more than a few in the business community wondering when those who presided over the government's fraudulent bookkeeping will be held to the same level of accountability as executives

never. Congress makes the laws, including one that apparently puts a briber in jail while the Congressman bribee goes free.

It is my understanding that the Clinton administration changed the way that many statistics were kept...things like unemployment. It is possible that they cooked the books in many ways.

[swheats]

"the most non-political, non-partisan agency in the government."

Just like the "most ethical Administration". Another lie from his enablers.

[Uncle Hal]

I am shocked I tell you shocked, that Clinton and company would lie and cook the books.

[iceskater]

It is my understanding that the Clinton administration changed the way that many statistics were kept...things like unemployment. It is possible that they cooked the books in many ways.

This is my recollection too. I vaguely remember that they changed the way inflation is calculated. I thought at the time that it seemed sneaky. I can't remember the details of what was changed, though. I try not to remember too much of the Clinton years since it tends to make me mad.

[cynicom]

katt...

Clinton and Gore promised us huge surpluses for at least a decade, you mean it aint so????? Course I use to believe in the tooth fairy.

[aristeides]

A cousin of mine who once worked in the Bureau of Labor Statistics told me that, when they didn't have a figure ready in time for the deadline, they made a figure up. My impression from what he said was that the made-up figures were not chosen to fit any ideological agenda: the bureau was just anxious to meet the deadline. But that was pre-Clinton. I suspect that the Clinton people, seeing that the government was already making figures up, decided to make up the numbers that were most favorable politically.

[cynicom]

katt...

Clinton and Gore promised us huge surpluses for at least a decade, you mean it aint so????? Course I use to believe in the tooth fairy.

[LarryLied]

Put a hose in the ground and flush Robert Rubin out of the rat hole he is hiding in. Bait won't work, he is so fat he can't eat anymore. Only way to get him is to use water pressure to pop him out of the ground.

[aristeides]

If the GNP was exaggerated in 1999 and 2000, how can we be sure that it really dropped in the first three quarters of 2001?

[1Old Pro]

Good ole Carl at Newsmax. Not afraid to break news that is out there but is only being talked about by a Rush Limbaugh or Gordon Liddy.

This story REALLY should be front page news.

[GSWarrior]

In a completely unintended way, Bush's election may turn out to be a good thing for the Democrats, especially with a press/media that likes to rewrite recent history.

How much tin foil would I need to espouse that the DNC and Clinton cronies helped orchestrate the Florida scenario because they knew: A) The economy was on borrowed time and better to have Bush in White House than Gore; and B) it effectively removes Gore from the list of serious future presidential candidates?

[swheats]

Credibility is everything. How far back in administrations were the numbers made up? Just wondering how far back the delusions go.

[ThePythonicCow]

Bump - Rush was all over this in his first hour today. Lets hope it makes the front page, in some form, in our lifetimes.

[maryz]

It is my understanding that the Clinton administration changed the way that many statistics were kept

Check out post #24 on this related thread: Clinton-Cooked Books? (Sorry - I don't know how to direct a link to a particular reply.)

[aristeides]

My cousin would have told me that in the late 1970's or early 1980's. I forget exactly when.

[rwfromkansas]

bump

[ClearCase_guy]

If the GNP was exaggerated in 1999 and 2000, how can we be sure that it really dropped in the first three quarters of 2001?

Interesting thought. It probably didn't play out this way, but it would be an interesting strategy to sabotage the next administration (if the sitting president has already had 2 terms, what does he care?). Just inflate all the numbers for your last 2 years in office, and make yourself look real good (legacy!). Then, when the next president gets in office and tells the truth, he looks real bad by comparison (legacy!).

I always suspect the worst when it comes to Clinton, but I doubt that this scenario actually went through his head.

[Jonathon Spectre]

Clinton? Lie and cheat? Bill Clinton?

Sheesh. Next you'll be telling me the War on (Some) Drugs is just a way to fill prisons, make jobs, radically expand the power of the federal government and shred the Constitution.